1. Field of the Art
This disclosure is generally related to machine support systems and, in particular, to turret and gimbal support systems for line-of-sight sensors and weapons on military vehicles.
2. Background
On military vehicles, whether ground-, sea-, aircraft-, or space-based, the placement and orientation of a sensor on a vehicle can be important. A warfighter's situational awareness, including that used for driving/piloting, collision avoidance, navigation, covert observation, targeting, etc. may depend upon having the best, least obstructed view. A line-of-sight sensor, which includes a sensor that requires an unobstructed line in space to what it is sensing, should not be occluded by the vehicle itself, human operators, large communication antennas, or other protrusions.
A “line-of-sight sensor” can include a millimeter wave scanner, ultraviolet sensor, optical sensor, infrared sensor, radar, lidar, laser rangefinder, or other such sensor as is known in the art.
Mounting a sensor on a vehicle so that it can be rotated 360° horizontally allows the sensor to be slewed in azimuth to look at almost any off-board location independent of the heading of the vehicle. Thus, an operator of a sensor does not need to tell the driver or pilot of the vehicle to turn the vehicle so that he or she can see a target. However, especially on surface vehicles, because of the need to mount antennas, weapons, and other sensors, a 360° rotatable sensor almost invariably is occluded by at least one protrusion from the vehicles unless the sensor is mounted higher than all other protrusions from the vehicle.
Mounting the sensor on a mast is one way of elevating the sensor above all other protrusions on a ground vehicle. However, the higher the mast, the greater the “signature,” or observability of the vehicle to an enemy. Furthermore, a mast expands the size envelope of the vehicle—making it less transportable on ships and cargo aircraft. Weight is also increased when the mass of the mast is taken into consideration.
Much of the same that can be said about sensors can also be said for line-of-sight weapons. A line-of-sight weapon, which includes weapons that require a relatively unobstructed line in space to what they are shooting, should not be occluded by the vehicle itself, human operators, communication antennas, or other protrusions such as sensors.
A “line-of-sight weapon” can include a gun, directional missile or rocket launcher, grenade launcher, ultrasonic weapon, electromagnetic impulse weapon, weaponized laser, or other such weapon as is known in the art.
A weaponized laser includes a laser with sufficient power to burn or singe a target at a tactical distance (e.g., >100 kW) or lower-powered lasers that can permanently or temporarily blind humans, charge coupled device (CCD) sensors of missiles, or electronic apertures.
Mounting a weapon on a ground vehicle so that it can be rotated 360° horizontally allows the weapon to shoot at almost any off-board location independent of the heading of the vehicle. Mounting the weapon higher than any other protrusion can ensure that it is not blocked. Yet, the same problems that arise with line-of-sight sensors arise with line-of-sight weapons.
Indeed, aimable, directable, guidable, steerable, or otherwise pointable devices, such as line-of-sight sensors or weapons, share the same problem in that they all should have an unobstructed 360° around them, yet they cannot all be the highest-mounted device.
Positioning and orienting both a pointable sensor and weapon on a vehicle typically involves design trade offs. If the flexibility of 360° situational awareness with the sensor is deemed more important than the flexibility of 360° prosecution of a target, then the sensor is typically mounted higher on a ground vehicle than the weapon. The weapon is not allowed to rotate to fire at the sensor lest it shoot up the sensor. If the flexibility of 360° prosecution of a target is deemed more important than the flexibility of 360° situation awareness with the sensor, then the weapon is mounted higher. The sensor cannot look through the weapon, and the vehicle driver must be cognizant to position the vehicle so that a target can be viewed by the sensor.
To alleviate this problem, more sensors or weapons can be used. For example, fore and aft sensors can be mounted lower than a central pylon for a weapon. The fore and aft sensors fill in the view where the other sensor(s) would be occluded by the pylon.
As sensors become less expensive, the alternative option of having multiple sensors is becoming more viable. However, having multiple sensors is usually more costly, complicated, and heavy than having just one sensor. This can be especially true in situations where the 360° slewing of the sensor is not just provided by a single rotational point but by a gimbal that allows movement both in azimuth and elevation.
U.S. Pat. No. 8,245,624 to Green discloses two weapons mounted to the same rotatable turret. Like a World War II vintage battleship turrets housing multiple guns, the '624 patent discloses a .50 caliber M2HB and a 40 mm MK 19 automatic grenade launcher that are aimed by the turret at the same offboard target. This allows the two weapons to rotate to shoot a target but not interfere with each other's line of bore. Yet, this solution does not solve the problem of having a sensor mast mounted nearby that must be avoided.
There is a need in the art for more flexible weapon and sensor mounting systems.